Emily Letts abortion video

[Dyakovo]

except that it doesn't happen

Tell me sir, do you think the operation of vending machine should be legal, keeping in mind that a man may one day take a dollar from a surgery fund for a poor old woman to buy a candy bar, thus condemning her to a horrible death?

Yes.

[Bythibus]

Tell me sir, do you think the operation of vending machine should be legal, keeping in mind that a man may one day take a dollar from a surgery fund for a poor old woman to buy a candy bar, thus condemning her to a horrible death?

Yes.

YOU HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE MAN!

[Korouse]

Day 3...

It still goes on...

[MERIZoC]

Day 3...

It still goes on...

Try day 2. And already over 100 pages!

[Dyakovo]

Yes.

YOU HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE MAN!

Yes.

[Bythibus]

Day 3...

It still goes on...

Try day 2. And already over 100 pages!

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly sadistic, secretly woman hating, and secretly just plain cruel.

[Kelinfort]

Day 3...

It still goes on...

People don't just disappear and stop talking when you log off, you know.

[Bythibus]

YOU HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE MAN!

Yes.

Well as long as we're being honest about who we are, I am a CIA Agent and you're under arrest for conspiracy to assassinate the elderly.

[Dyakovo]

Try day 2. And already over 100 pages!

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly sadistic, secretly woman hating, and secretly just plain cruel.

And those who aren't secretive about being sadistic, as shown by my presence here.

[Bythibus]

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly sadistic, secretly woman hating, and secretly just plain cruel.

And those who aren't secretive about being sadistic, as shown by my presence here.

I suspect you're the type of man who'd go to a funeral he knows no one at to call the person a drunk. I can admire that kind of man.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly sadistic, secretly woman hating, and secretly just plain cruel.

And those who aren't secretive about being sadistic, as shown by my presence here.

I smell sadism here.

[The Flood]

Try day 2. And already over 100 pages!

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly sadistic, secretly woman hating, and secretly just plain cruel.

Enough with the personal attacks, please.

[Korouse]

And those who aren't secretive about being sadistic, as shown by my presence here.

I smell sadism here.

Sadism is testing a deadly poison on Jews.

[Dyakovo]

And those who aren't secretive about being sadistic, as shown by my presence here.

I suspect you're the type of man who'd go to a funeral he knows no one at to call the person a drunk. I can admire that kind of man.

I would... Except that sounds like it might take some effort...

[Dyakovo]

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly sadistic, secretly woman hating, and secretly just plain cruel.

Enough with the personal attacks, please.

Persecution complex much?

[MERIZoC]

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly sadistic, secretly woman hating, and secretly just plain cruel.

Enough with the personal attacks, please.

That wasn't personal at all. He/She was making sweeping and generalized statements. Much more understandable.

[Korouse]

Enough with the personal attacks, please.

Persecution complex much?

Let's call the pro-life people sadist, because "secretly" they are sadists, although if it were secret, nobody would know. Especially on the internet.

Yeah, that seems right.

[Forsher]

The objection here is that a foetus cannot be a parasite because it is the same species. It's a reasonable objection because parasites are of a different species.

That's nice. I have no idea why you're telling ME this. I never said a fetus is a parasite. My post was only in response to the claim that a parasites must be of a different species than their host. That's clearly not true.

I started with this for the very simple reason that you'd written: "I'll say this again: parasitism is not restricted to organisms of the same species. Kleptoparasitism exists, you know." This is all very well and good but the problem is that the tone of the sentence is clearly one of disagreement but what it actually says agrees with the objection.

Person A says x.
Person B disagrees and provides and example of x.

Whether or not you said that a foetus is a parasite isn't relevant because the issue that I took with the post is the above.

When we look at the definition raised we see, again, this distinction is species.

Again, that's nice. It also completely and utterly ignores the link I posted. The Wikipedia definition is such because that's a general statement. There is, however, no indication whatsoever on that Wikipedia page this this is ALWAYS true. In fact, your own source states:

Intraspecific social parasitism may also occur. One example of this is parasitic nursing, where some individuals take milk from unrelated females. In wedge-capped capuchins, higher ranking females sometimes take milk from low ranking females without any reciprocation. The high ranking females benefit at the expense of the low ranking females.[12]

Then that is my mistake.

I note that if I'd read down further than just the opening definition of your link I'd have seen a reference to intraspecific kleptoparasitism then and there. This is, however, not a mistake that is anywhere near as concerning as my earlier blanket rejection of the possibility of parasitism within a species... although, as that appears limited to social parasitism it's not really relevant here... because it doesn't change the issue that I had, although I may have just assumed a typo.

Judging from the fact that my OWN source is a clear example of a case where parasitism can be between two organisms of the same species, and your own damn source admits that this is possible, you're taking that definition to heart WAY too much.

Coolio, still doesn't change that your initial response is phrased in such a way that it agree with the poster you were trying to disagree with.

Kleptoparasitism is neither here nor there. Mav uses it as an example of a parasitical relationship that "is not restricted to organisms of the same species" in reply to a person arguing that because foetuses are the same species as their 'host' they aren't parasites: "a developing baby is, more often than not, the same species as the mother". What Mav should've done is found an example of a parasitical relationship between members of the same species. Looking at the definitions in this post (the one from Wiki, and the quoted one is some respects*) that would be an uphill battle.

Uh... what? No I didn't. Kleptoparasitism, per my source:

Kleptoparasitism may be intraspecific (the parasite is the same species as the victim) or interspecific (the parasite is a different species). In the latter case, the parasites are commonly close relatives of the organisms they parasitize ("Emery's Rule").

I have no idea what could have possibly given you the idea that I was trying to give an example where parasitism is of the same species. It was, in fact, the opposite.

Let's compare what you responded to and what you wrote again.

a developing baby is, more often than not, the same species as the mother This means, to be clear, a parasite cannot be of the same species as the 'host'.

I'll say this again: parasitism is not restricted to organisms of the same species. Kleptoparasitism exists, you know. This means, to be clear, parasites can be of a different species to the 'host'... they don't have to be of the same species.

You're telling me that you were trying to provide an example that agreed with what the other poster wrote while, at the same time, adopting a tone of disagreement? You can see how I am confused, right?

In other words, I got that you were trying to provide the example of a difference loud and clear, it's just that it makes no apparent sense for you to do that compared to the post you were disagreeing with.

[Pilotto]

Try day 2. And already over 100 pages!

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly openly sadistic, secretly woman hating child murdering, and secretly just plain cruel.

Fixed that.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Abortion threads are magnets for the secretly openly sadistic, secretly woman hating child murdering, and secretly just plain cruel.

Fixed that.

It's good that no one here is advocating infanticide. Which abortion isn't. Try again.

[Viritica]

There was actually a whole thread on partial-birth abortion a while back, and in that thread it was proven that the practice carries no medical benefits whatsoever.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=287167&hilit=Partial+birth+abortion

[Pilotto]

Fixed that.

It's good that no one here is advocating infanticide. Which abortion isn't. Try again.

It's a sad thing that nobody here has been able to explain why it is acceptable to terminate the life of a fully-formed fetus, and what the practical difference between that and infanticide is. So, y'know, try again, I guess.

[Korouse]

Fixed that.

It's good that no one here is advocating infanticide. Which abortion isn't. Try again.

I don't agree with abortion, but it's definitely not sadistic if you want to have an abortion.

Unless, you have an abortion just to kill something...

which is very unlikely as you'd imagine.

[Korouse]

It's good that no one here is advocating infanticide. Which abortion isn't. Try again.

It's a sad thing that nobody here has been able to explain why it is acceptable to terminate the life of a fully-formed fetus, and what the practical difference between that and infanticide is. So, y'know, try again, I guess.

Oh, you were talking about fully-formed fetuses...

That is considered killing, but not infanticide.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

It's good that no one here is advocating infanticide. Which abortion isn't. Try again.

It's a sad thing that nobody here has been able to explain why it is acceptable to terminate the life of a fully-formed fetus, and what the practical difference between that and infanticide is. So, y'know, try again, I guess.

One resides inside the body of another human being who may not want it there.